Slashdot Mirror
Interview with Red Hat VP Michael Tiemann
david_ross writes "An interview with Red Hat's Vice President Michael Tiemann has just been posted on LinuxQuestions.org. His responses in the interview show that RedHat's community product, Fedora, has a bright future: "The project has been incredibly successful, and we have a lot of people outside of Red Hat to thank for that. What Red Hat must now do is to finish the job of making Fedora a true community project by publishing, and getting accepted, a governance model". "
I disagree. FreeBSD is not cutting edge but its not behind the times either and is stable.
That is the problem with Linux. It ever works and the applications are buggy with little QA. Debian is the only exception.
At least Windows doesn't have this problem.
http://saveie6.com/
Their commercial offerings are a pain in the butt, the kernel they use is patched all over the place and they don't even offer support for normal Linux kernels.
That "patched" up kernel that incoveniences so much gives my servers rock-solid stability, better performance, and increased hardware support that "stock" kernels don't have. I have no need to use a stock kernel.
Waaah mommy, I'm a l33t gentoo user who needs to use 2.6.8.not-even-out-yet.1. This distribution is not for you, it is for people who want *support*. Their kernels are tested and approved so that the play well with a long line of independent software and hardware vendors. It is necessary that is 'so patched up'.
For all intents and purposes they are *not* a Linux distribution but a clever new way to achieve another vendor lock-in scenario.
Vendor "lock-in scenario"? Are you smoking crack? At last check the entire GPL'd source code was included. Doesn't sound like "vendor lock-in" to me.
Your post sounds like a "clever new way to" troll.
My *proffessional* experience with their products have been nothing short of disappointing,
And my company has nothing but glowing things to say about them. Every since we switched to RHEL (from a stock kernel and Slackware), our servers have stopped kernel panicing, our Apache processes no longer spin out of control for no apparent reason, and our SCSI RAID performance is way better. Additionally, Oracle actually supports RHEL as a certified platform.
all the advantages that Linux has, like flexibility and standardisation, RH has eliminated them one by one with their stringent support policies
This is FUD. Plain and simple. Where is the proof to backup your foundless claims?
and nothing less then time consuming and awkward ways of keeping machines updated.
Oh yes, logging into a website and hitting an update button to have it automatically update my servers is *so* painful.
Or for that matter just setting them up to automatically update themselves.
Seriously, lay down the crack pipe! All I have to do get the servers to update is register them with up2date, set them to automatically update in their profile and every once in a while when there's a kernel upgrade reboot them. Otherwise, I don't have to do jack to them!
They don't even guarantee API compatibility within major releases so I can't even update machines without testing the updates first.
Oh dear ! Someone call the news stations!
At last check *very* few companies, distributions, etc. claim any type of compatability between major releases. And honestly, since each release is supported five years, and your systems work you have no reason to upgrade. Besides, how can RHEL guarantee compatability between major versions when all of the 'standardised Linux components' you're so fond of spouting off about don't guarantee major compatability between their major revisions.
Come back when you actually have some real facts to backup your valueless claims.